Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 7th Jul 2011 17:36 UTC, submitted by vivainio
Linux Linux.FR has an interview with Lennart Poettering of PulseAudio and systemd fame (among others). Regarding PulseAudio: "I can understand why people were upset, but quite frankly we didn't really have another option than to push it into the distributions when we did. While PulseAudio certainly wasn't bug-free when the distributions picked it up the majority of issues were actually not in PulseAudio itself but simply in the audio drivers. PulseAudio's timer-based scheduling requires correct timing information supplied by the audio driver, and back then the drivers weren't really providing that. And that not because the drivers were really broken, but more because the hardware was, and the drivers just lacked the right set of work-arounds, quirks and fixes to compensate for it."
Permalink for comment 480021
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Also, why?
by cmchittom on Thu 7th Jul 2011 19:20 UTC
cmchittom
Member since:
2011-03-18

In the interview, Lennart says:

An audio stack that is not capable of timer-based scheduling and dynamic latency control based on that is not useful on consumer devices.


Why? I mean, seriously, why? All I want is my computer to play my audio files, and maybe do a nice beep at me when it pops up an error dialogue. I know there are people who want all the sophisticated audio capabilities, but the vast majority, I think, don't. Let the people that want that kind of thing get it elsewhere instead of breaking everybody's sound with PulseAudio. Pushing PA on everybody really struck me as forcing the "right way" over the "way that actually works." It's exactly this kind of overly frequent reimplementation for no gain to most users—quite the opposite—that drove me away from Linux.

Reply Score: 4